Conceptually, it isn't all that different from a railgun, in that it is firing inert slugs instead of self-propelled ones. The idea that there is "no recoil" must be an exaggeration. Equal and opposite reactions and all that, which isn't to say that it might be low recoil because it isn't using more force than it needs. Likewise "frictionless" is probably an exaggeration. Unless you've got object controlled by electric fields in a vacuum, you don't have frictionless, and that doesn't seem to be the concept here.

I'd imagine that such a system would be pretty finicky in its fire control system. Getting a round to where you want it to go, when it is travelling at a high rate of speed for fairly long distances requires an ecquistitely fine touch at the point where the projectile exits the system.

Another big issue, of course, is how much power would be required. It doesn't sound like the weight figures cited include a generator, and if it is operating on electrical power, presumably those power demands are substantial. The power requirements may be less than a railgun, as it sounds as if you would have far more time to spin up the projectiles to speed, but the energy requirements ought to be similar.

It certainly seems possible to me that a centerfuge concept might end up being more prmising than the railgun concepts currently being pursued for the DD(X) and FCS.

Staff: Mentor

There are a number of things that make me skeptical of it, and the first is the no-recoil thing. However, "throwing" the projectiles with a centrifuge means the recoil is just the start-up torque of the centrifuge. But that creates another problem - how long does this thing take to turn on?

The owner had a brochure that was available on the defense review website and made a few claims that were physically impossible, regardless of the level of advanced technology used in the design of this hoax. Number one, the brochure said "no recoil", end quote. I brought this up on the defense review website and received a BS answer by the supposed "St. George" who is the inventor. I refer you to the website to see specifically what I asked and what he answered. Secondly, the power requirement would be something on the order of megawatts, and the brochure says 150 watts average. Lastly, the ballistic characteristics of golf-ball-like projectiles would make them utterly useless beyond a very short distance. By the response I got and the inter-relation between the website administrator of defensereview.com and the mysterious St. George, I suspect that they are one in the same and this hoax was just created for some attention for childish people who have a website that feebly attempts to 'look official'. Just look at the rest of the website and you will see what I mean. It's trailer trash.

Having thoroughly read the previous posts now, I cannot sit by and allow this nonsense to continue. Yes, I know I just signed up here and am new to the forum, but you need to listen. This system advertises claims that violate the basic laws of physics. Use the density of steel, the volume of a .308 or .50 cal sphere, the claimed 120,000 rounds per minute at 8,000 feet per second and you will get a power requriement that exceeds the advertised 150 watts. In fact, it's megawatts. And NO, repeat NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, the recoil is NOT just the startup torque of the centrifuge. NO, NO, NO. Go back and read your PHYSICS book!!!!!! Momentum MUST be conserved. Energy MUST be conserved. This thing is a HOAX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!